Should Mizzou make a QB change for the second half?

Quarterback is the most scrutinized position in all of sports. The man under center—or at least a few yards behind center as he is in most offenses these days—is always going to get too much credit and too much blame. Missouri is no exception. For most of the bye week, the main source of conversation for Tiger fans has been “Should there be a quarterback change?”

Most people have already made up their minds. An informal sampling of online comments indicates there are a lot of Missouri fans who want to see someone else at quarterback when the Tigers start the second half of the season next Saturday afternoon against Vanderbilt. Who do they want? That doesn’t really seem to matter. They just want somebody else.

This is not a unique phenomenon. It hasn’t been said for years that the backup quarterback is the most popular guy on the team for no reason. It’s often true. If the team’s record isn’t good, it’s almost always true. And, in case you haven’t noticed, Missouri’s 2-4 record isn’t very good.

We’re going to attack this issue from two vantage points. First, will Missouri make a quarterback change?

The only person who truly knows that is Eli Drinkwitz. When I asked him on Wednesday if he was open to getting another quarterback playing time, here’s what he said: “I’d absolutely consider it, absolutely something that we’re talking about but something that has to be earned in practice and not something that can just be given,” he answered. “If we put somebody into a game we believe they have the ability to move us into the end zone and have a full comprehension of what we’re trying to do. If you don’t have a full comprehension bad things happen.”

That takes some reading between the lines. But the only logical way to read it is that of all of its options, the Missouri coaching staff believes Brady Cook is the quarterback that has earned the spot. What Drinkwitz said doesn’t rule out the possibility of someone else playing quarterback, but it sure doesn’t make it seem likely. And for the record, we’re not talking about taking snaps in a 35-3 game against New Mexico State or (and this seems less likely) Vanderbilt. We’re talking about actual meaningful reps.

We know your answer to what Drinkwitz said. “But Cook isn’t leading Missouri to the end zone. And who cares if he knows what to do? He’s not doing it often enough.”

There’s some truth to that. Cook is 7th in the SEC in passing yards. But he’s ninth in completion percentage, 11th in QBR and yards per attempt and has thrown more interceptions than anyone other than Spencer Rattler and Anthony Richardson (for what it's worth, Cook's numbers are pretty similar to these two and nobody is asking for those guys to be benched because South Carolina and Florida are both 4-2 with a top 25 win at the time I’m writing this). Against Power Five competition, Cook has thrown one touchdown and five interceptions and Missouri has lost all four games.

Which leads us to the second part of this: Should Missouri make a quarterback change?

I said back in August that if Mizzou was 2-4 coming out of the Florida game, I’d turn the reigns over to Sam Horn. And if Missouri chose to do that, I wouldn’t object to it. The thing is, it’s just not that simple.

What if Harrison Mevis had made a kick or Nate Peat had held on to the ball for three more feet? What if Missouri hadn’t had two crippling offensive line penalties against Georgia? What if he hadn’t been sacked 12 times and running for his life plenty more? What if his receiving corps had been healthy at Florida? All of these things could have Missouri sitting 4-2 or 5-1. And none of them has anything to do with Brady Cook’s ability or production. If even one or two of those things had happened, are we having this discussion?

My preseason stance on Horn was really based on this: If Missouri was 2-4 a large contingent of the fanbase was going to have given up on the season and moved on to basketball. You’d need something to keep the fans interested and to encourage them to buy tickets next year. I contended that Mizzou fans would stomach 4-8 or 5-7 with a true freshman under center much more easily than they would a third-year sophomore.

I don’t think any of that is necessarily wrong. But I’ve also come to decide it’s not a reason to make a quarterback change. Coaches can’t start doing things for PR purposes. It’s a slippery, slippery slope.

Go back to what Drinkwitz said: Playing time can’t be given, it has to be earned. None of us know what Sam Horn (or for that matter, Tyler Macon) has earned in practice. We aren’t there. You know who knows who should be playing? The other players. If you put Macon or Horn out there and it hasn’t been earned in practice, it’s a good way to lose your locker room. So it sounds good for all of us to sit here and say “How do you know he won’t be good in a game if you don’t let him play in a game?” But coaches don’t play guys on Saturday who haven’t earned it between Sunday and Thursday. It’s just not how it works.

"I do believe in Sam Horn, I believe Sam Horn is a very talented player. I believe Tyler Macon is a very talented player," Drinkwitz told KTRS this week. "And if they give us the best chance to win, I promise you they'll play. And we are evaluating do those guys deserve an opportunity to get a series in a game to show what they can do? But nothing is going to be given. It's got to be earned."

Embed content not availableManage privacy settings

The other assumption we’re making about Horn is that he’d be good if he went in the game. But what if he wasn’t? You could obviously do long-term damage to Horn himself and his future. But you could also actually do the same thing to the buzz around your program. It was a popular thing after Connor Bazelak transferred for Missouri fans to insist that no matter who played quarterback, there’s no way it could be worse than it was last year. There might be some people rethinking that stance now.

Along the same lines, what if Horn plays and looks awful? Now you’ve got a fanbase that’s already skeptical thinking “Hang on, this dude’s the future of the program? We’re in big trouble.” It wouldn’t be fair to Horn or to Missouri, but it would certainly happen with some.

So, should Missouri make a quarterback change? Ultimately, I don’t think so. Not yet.

I’d be in favor of Horn (or Macon) getting an opportunity in a couple of games. If they earn a more consistent opportunity, great. Or if Missouri loses three of its next four games and is sitting at 3-7, turn it over to one of them for the final two games when a bowl game is out of the question anyway. There’s not a significant difference between 6-6 or 5-7 or 4-8 to me personally. But there is one to the players who are fighting for a bowl game and the coaches who are fighting for a job and to a lot of the fans who are being asked to plunk down money for season tickets and NIL deals. So you don’t make a move you aren’t sure about until you know that sixth win can’t happen.

Ultimately, Missouri is in the place nobody wanted it to be six weeks ago. We’re halfway through the season and the best win is Louisiana Tech. The path to even the most minor of bowl games now includes either two upsets or an APR exception to get you into a bowl game at 5-7 because not enough teams won six games to fill the spots. I don’t think throwing a new quarterback behind a subpar offensive line with a banged-up receiving corps is going to make those things more likely to happen.

So, ultimately, I’ve changed my mind. I think you ride out the season with Cook and hope he gets better. And then you enter an offseason that is likely to determine Eli Drinkwitz’s long-term future at Missouri hoping you got it right with the four-star quarterback and, ready or not, you put all your eggs in Horn’s basket for 2023.